Human Resources Committee on Dec. 5th, 2022

[Simon Lahoud]

Thank you, Romy.

There are just two points I'd like to make. First, 74% of the units we have committed funding to have met and exceeded our affordability criteria. In terms of depth, we are actually at 57% of median market rent.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

I'm sorry, but I'm going to interrupt for a second.

Perhaps we can get the data, because we're just walking around in circles, here. I would appreciate getting the actual data with respect to units that have been funded under the coinvestment fund and what affordability criteria they met. In other words, how many units receive 80% of average market rent in that category, broken down by the year in which the program rolled out, as well as by province and territory? I would also like to get information on how many units, similarly, use 30% of the household's total income, so we can get a breakdown of what actually went down. Talking around in circles does not help.

Finally, I would like to know this: Who made the decision on that affordability criterion for the coinvestment fund, and at what juncture? The target of the coinvestment fund was supposed to be rents that did not exceed 30% of total income. That was supposed to be the affordability criterion, but somehow it has shifted. Is it a wonder the Auditor General found the program did not meet the affordability needs of the people who need it the most?

If I could get that information, I would very much appreciate it. Can I get confirmation that I will get that data?

[Romy Bowers]

Mr. Chair, we'll provide the data, as requested.

Thank you.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you.

On a different question, with respect to even the rapid housing initiative and the national housing coinvestment fund—both of these programs—the Auditor General indicated this:

[A]lthough the corporation knew that housing types likely to benefit vulnerable groups, such as transitional and supportive housing, were being funded, the corporation did not know whether priority vulnerable groups who were intended to benefit from approved projects were actually housed once projects were completed.

Could CMHC table this information? What data does CMHC have regarding who was housed under the national housing strategy programs specifically related to the six programs audited by the Auditor General, through which the government has spent $4.5 billion?

The Auditor General report also revealed that CMHC didn't know whether projects intended for priority vulnerable groups, such as people with disabilities, were actually housing these priority groups.

My question is, can we also get a breakdown of those units? How many of those units were targeted housing for people living with disabilities?

[Romy Bowers]

We'd be very pleased to provide that information.

I would like to note, however, that the construction cycles are long. It takes some time from funding to first occupancy. We are dependent on proponents for the information. As soon as that information is available, we provide it publicly. I wanted to note there is a delay in the receipt of the information, in some circumstances.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

That's fair enough.

With respect to the data, can we get information that indicates which units have been completed and occupied? What does the data look like, and what is the occupation date? This is so we'd know when the project was completed and occupied. What projects have not yet been completed and are therefore not occupied? Is that data yet to come? What is the projected timeline for when the project would be completed? Then we could anticipate when that information would be available and provided to the committee.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Ms. Kwan.

I'll let Ms. Bowers respond to your questions to confirm that, but your time is up.

[Romy Bowers]

Mr. Chair, we'll provide the information requested to the extent it's available to us, and we'll provide it on a continual basis, so the committee has the full data we have at our disposal.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Ms. Kwan.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

I'm sorry, Mr. Chair. I have a point of clarification.

Ms. Bowers said, “to the extent” the information is “available to us”. If the information is not available, I think the committee would appreciate receiving the reason it's not available.

[Romy Bowers]

Your point is taken.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Ms. Kwan and Ms. Bowers.

We'll now go to Mrs. Gray for five minutes.

[Tracy Gray, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to all the witnesses for being here.

To tag onto that, I want to get clarification on whether any reports or information any member is asking for here, today, would be available—would come to the committee before the next committee meeting with CMHC in the new year.

Can you state that for the record?

[Romy Bowers]

Yes.

[Tracy Gray, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

That's great. Thank you very much.

My first question is, have you had a CMHC board meeting since the Auditor General released her report on chronic homelessness on November 15?

[Romy Bowers]

We had a board meeting at the end of November.

[Tracy Gray, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Was that a regularly scheduled board meeting, or was that an emergency meeting that was called because of the Auditor General's report?

[Romy Bowers]

It was a regularly scheduled board meeting.

[Tracy Gray, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Were there questions asked of you by the board members on the Auditor General's report? Was it a topic of discussion at that board meeting?

[Romy Bowers]

It was a topic of discussion, and I confirmed to the board that I agreed with the recommendations made by the Auditor General and that I was committed to the action plans that were articulated in that report.

[Tracy Gray, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

In its response to the Auditor General, the CMHC said that “[CHMC] is the lead and accountable for the national housing strategy”. Then it went on to say that by December 2023, which is a year from now, there would be clarification of “accountability for the achievement of the national housing strategy”.

Was the board happy with this response?

[Romy Bowers]

CMHC is responsible for funding the capital expenditure required for housing for homelessness issues. Infrastructure, the department we work very closely with, is responsible for the Reaching Home program.

To achieve the chronic homelessness targets requires CMHC and Infrastructure Canada to work very closely together, but, because of the nature of homelessness, it also requires very close collaboration between all levels of government and non-profit groups, and we are committed to doing that to ensure that collectively we can eliminate homelessness in Canada.

[Tracy Gray, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

In this strategy, the overarching strategy started in 2017 and, after the Auditor General's report, in the response, you said that a year from now, as I just said, you would determine who has accountability for the achievement of the national housing strategy.

Are you saying that the CMHC is not accountable and that you're going to take a year to determine who is accountable? If so, who would be on that list of who might be accountable, if it's not the CMHC?

[Romy Bowers]

CMHC is accountable for the national housing strategy and its targets. For this particular target, we have to work in very close collaboration with the homelessness department within Infrastructure Canada. There are also other levels of government and non-profit organizations.

[Tracy Gray, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Again, what you're saying is that it's going to take a year to determine who is accountable, even though you are the ones who are fulfilling the strategy. You wouldn't consider yourselves as being ones that would be accountable for the strategy.